In my local courtroom today for a couple of hearings. Once again using my iPhone to do this post. While watching the proceedings and observing the other attorneys, I am amazed at the lack of attorneys using anything other than paper.
Paper calenders, paper files and no PDA’s or computers. I was having a conversation with one attorney about how I do things. He was amazed that I get my dictation done by someone I never see. He was also telling me how he was trying to train the staff to scan everything that comes into his office.
Are attorneys in general afraid of tech or just afraid of change?
Around my legal community, there are a handful who use PDAs and another handful from big firms who use smart phones. Beyond that, a laptop in a courtroom is virtually unheard of in state court.
In our local bankruptcy court, there are a couple of attorneys who maintain their files on a laptop, as does our Ch. 13 Trustee and her staff attorneys.
As to the whys of this turtle's pace to adopt more technology, my guess is most attorneys feel computers in the office is sufficient.
I think it's less about fear of change, than about fear of the time it will take to learn the new systems, etc.
I just recently embarked on the switch from PC to Mac. The Mac is very easy to use, but the changeover has had a significant learning curve. Merely getting the machine to sync with my palm treo, for example, took a significant investment of my time. (which would otherwise have been billable time)
For a lawyer who's busy, or who's expected by a firm to bill a minimum number of hours, making this investment represents a challenge.
When all is said and done, I'm sure I'll see a productivity gain, but in the meantime, i'll be in a loss position for a while.
If you're rushing from court, to meeting, to office, etc., paper and pen may still be the most efficient means of recording your notes, time, communications with others, etc., At least until the use of technology becomes second nature…
I would be afraid of that iPhone. How much change can a person take.
A lot of places you could not take any kind of gadget into the building with you, much less the courtroom.
I've taken paper printouts of my calendar to courts where I have to leave my Treo in the car.
You can maybe use electronic display when trying to hypnotize the jury, but at the end of the day the judge and the clerk require paper filings (for the record), so why bother going digital on a motion?
I'm in agreement with Gordon. It's a little bit fear, but the fear is of losing material because you don't know how to use the technology, or fear that you'll pick the wrong electronic system.
Small firms that don't have tech people on staff are least likely to switch to digital devises and systems. Because even though paper may be less efficient, it's still more efficient than having the attorneys read computer manuals for days on end.